I remember talking with candidates in hard-hit foreclosure areas in 2010 about the impact of that on their campaign strategies. Simply put, many of the traditional Democratic voters in those areas, who came out in large numbers in 2008, had scattered, victims of the foreclosure crisis. Even if they could be found, they may no longer be in the district, and they certainly aren’t focused on politics so much as survival. The other problem is that it’s hard to schedule an effective precinct walk when you go to a neighborhood and half of the homes are vacant.
The Obama campaign, after four years of ineffective programs to deal with the foreclosure crisis, now has to deal with these problems first-hand.
By day, Lynnette Acosta, a 34-year- old mother of two, is an information-technology manager in Orlando, Florida. By night, she’s a sleuth for President Barack Obama’s re-election campaign, scouring for potential voters.
In central Florida, that means knocking on doors in Hispanic neighborhoods with foreclosure rates as high as 30 percent, where once-registered Democrats have been evicted, their homes now owned by the bank. Volunteers walk house-to- house to determine the number of empty homes per precinct, then look for contact information for voters who once lived in them [...]
As Obama confronts a housing crisis that he’s acknowledged underestimating, his campaign is facing a different kind of foreclosure problem on the streets of Florida and other battleground states, where evictions have left holes in its voter lists. Volunteers like Acosta are central to the campaign’s effort to populate its databases with current addresses and working phone numbers to get out the vote.
It will take a massive use of resources to map out entire neighborhoods and entire swing states, particularly ones in high-foreclosure areas like Florida and Nevada and Ohio, to determine who lives in the homes and who doesn’t. And it’s not only about finding those voters, it’s about convincing them of the worthiness of the Administration that allowed massive continued abuse in the mortgage market and did little to help them keep their homes. And the communities most ravaged by the crisis line up demographically with the communities that most supported Obama – African-Americans and Hispanics, primarily.
This is a less relevant side effect to the destruction of communities in the foreclosure crisis than, say, the actual destruction. But for the Obama campaign, it represents chickens coming home to roost, to paraphrase Rev. Jeremiah Wright. Maybe they should have thought about keeping their promises and helping people stave off illegal foreclosures, with the recognition that they’d have to go back and locate the same people four years later.





31 Comments


Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About FDL News Desk
I worked north Collier and southern Lee counties in Florida in the 2008 cycle. Huge tract developments, too far from house to house, especially down long drives, to walk at any time. One worker drives, other jumps out to plant door hangers, or knock on doors.
Every third house was abandoned, either foreclosed or for sale, in the largest development district in Florida. This is Fort Myers and Naples, the latter a HUGE Republican voting block.
Every abandoned house should get a lawn sign, “Another eviction, thanks to Republican Policies.”
Hmmm.
Let me see if I understand what you are saying, DDay.
All these people, and no one knows how many, suffered the catastrophe of losing their homes to massive criminal bank fraud, which Barack Obama has defended as not illegal, even as he has surrounded himself with some of the principle “players”, executives of those very banks, as his advisers, friends, and money-laden allies.
Would that be correct?
And while this was going on … and afterwards, these people, who might have voted for Barack Obama were simply abandoned BY Barack Obama. He did not, in the political vernacular, “Have their backs”.
Would that be correct?
Now, today, Barack Obama decides that HE has need of these people, not to help THEM, but so that they might help HIM … win an election.
Would that be correct?
So, doing what would have been the right thing to do, the just, the humane, AND the proper thing to do … Barack Obama did not or would not do … instead, HE is desirous that those whom HE has treated very poorly, by any rational or reasonable measure, should have HIS back?
Would that be correct?
Once again, it would seem that everything is about Obama, his needs, his priorities, his election.
Would that be correct?
If all of these things are correct, then what is the “problem” here?
And whose problem is it?
Who “owns” this “problem” … the dispossessed or the man who has nothing but praise for the criminals responsible for the destruction, even as he protects those criminals, as does his party, from criminal AND civil sanction?
What is the very worst thing that can happen to Barack Obama?
What is the very worst thing that can happen to those who are in pain and suffering great loss, now, as they have been for years, and will continue to be in pain and suffering, for years to come, even by the most optimistic of estimates?
Is there a massive disconnect here, both in understanding and consequence?
Correct me if I am wrong, but it certainly appears to me that such is the case.
Why, in the warmest place of human imagination, would or should these people, who have been grievously harmed, come to the aid of a man who has had a central role in their pain and loss?
How would aiding and supporting Barack Obama be, by the wildest stretch of that imagination I just mentioned, of ANY worth or value to those who have been harmed?
Would it not be utter madness, complete insanity, for those many to support either Democrat Barack Obama OR his Republican opponent?
Kansas ain’t the only place, Dorothy, where people are asked and expected to vote against their own best interests.
DW
I completely disagree with your suggestion for the lawn sign! While it’s true that the Bush years pumped up the housing bubble, Obama did absolutely nothing to help Main Street in the aftermath of the economic crash. I’ve been in foreclosure for 2-1/2 years with all of the stress involved every time there was a court date because I would be homeless if the judge took my house and gave it to the bank – who I might add gave me a predatory mortgage and thought it was just a swell way of doing business because I signed the loan documents – and I’m not kidding about that because that’s what one of their supervisors told me two weeks ago.
I’ve followed the foreclosure news for almost the same length of time and know firsthand and through the great reporting that FDL, Naked Capitalism and other sites and bloggers have done. I didn’t vote for Obama in 2008 because I live in Illinois, in the greater Chicagoland area, and knew him for what he has now shown he is, an empty suit who shills for Wall Street. But even so, he had the opportunity when putting his team together to do the right thing and willingly chose not to. I didn’t know when he announced that his ecomonic team would be the same liars and idiots who helped Clinton destroy Glass-Stegall that I would lose my job within 3 months, or that I would be sitting here today still wondering if I’m going to be homeless because I can’t get the bank’s servicing company to work with me on one of his signature foreclosure programs. People have got to stop giving him a pass on this crap and telling everyone that they need to hold their nose and vote for him because he’s better than the other guy! Obama and Romney both suck and will do exactly as the MOTUs on Wall Street instruct.
To you and I, yes. To Obama and his GOTV staff, no.
To Obama and his GOTV staff, perhaps (to be determined based on results of GOTV efforts and the election in general). To me (and presume you), Obama should have kept his promises because they were promises and because they were “the right thing to do” as he often says.
I hope things work out for you chicagogal.
You are right and I wish you well with your home!
Who’s in charge of Obama’s re-election strategy, Red Klotz?
What you have missing is passion. It is not enough to make people vote for you because the other guy is going to be worse. If Obama wins, he is really going to eek out a win. I realize that there are a lot of people who will vote for Obama, because they are unable to connect what is happening to them to Obama. However, there is no reason to vote for a man who basically lied to get elected for the first term, and who was basically a stooge of the elites. Look how much effort it took to create the CFPB, and the Republicans will not stop trying to castrate it. Look at health care, which was a gift to the big PHARMA and the insurance companies. Cost increases will not stop, but now you must buy it or be penalized. So health insurance costs will just keep on going up. And the list goes on and on. So it is wonder that people have lost passion for Obama. But he also lost his financial backers. Everything he is promising to do is going to happen in his second term. I need to laugh at this (or should I say cry?).
The mark of a true friend………….. that can be vouched for by the many school and college chums that have waxed lyrical about Barack’s honest, caring, walk-the-extra-mile warmth.
x2 — and good luck.
By George, I think you got it.
That’s interesting, isn’t it?! I do not see a string of classmates of the good BO who are coming forward to support him. Maybe they know something that others don’t.
I heard Jill Stein on Jennifer Granholm tonight. Unfortunately she had to talk fast to escape Jennifer who seems an Obamabot to the core. But she talked about hiring twenty five million people. Imagine that. And she said Obama has done not so much in four years. Imagine that.
Too bad she has not chance in hell. Jennfier was worried she would be a spoiler. You think? And whose fault is that exactly? Imagine that.
(((chicagogal)))
Sh*t, I missed that.
I wondered too in another post how much of the supposed progressive vote Obama will lose in this election. It’s hard to tell. Clearly there are people who are dissatisfied with him, but then you see sites like DailyKos and TPM that used rail non-stop against Bush’s war, secrecy and crony capitalist policies but who now excuse the same behavior from Obama, makes me wonder.
She alluded to the wars, the drones, the ineffective financial regs,etc. But she had to talk too fast. If she could afford a real staff to carry some of this message, I think she could really do some damage. then she would be a spoiler. I doubt she will come back. Too dangerous for the status quo.
I think what we see on Kos, et al is a real fear that Mitt will get in. Many people, most of my family, don’t particularly like Obama but the alternative is too scary for them. So if Jill Stein had a real campaign staff …..
Well, he can give me a call.
I was foreclosed on in November, 2008. No, I do not live in the same house, because I LOST IT. I had to move. In fact I ended up transferring to a different town. But I’ll bet my name is available somewhere. I tried for 11 months to get my congressman and senators to give a shit. I thought I was the only one going through this because I was among the first. After I lost the house, then I started hearing about crooked servicers, but when I was screaming about it, I was called a liar. Then I gave up and walked away fom the house I raised my 4 children in.
There are millions of us. He isn’t really trying very hard if he can’t find anyone who has been foreclosed on. Bullshit.
What nerve to be looking for these poor people to start with!! The chickens have come home to roost AND crap all over Oboover’s campaign.
Well, Granholm is likely a party animal to the bone, but I wonder if she’s also on the make for a SC appointment. Granholm earlier had been mentioned as a possibility. I remind you that only weeks before MFGlobal blew up and when Geithner’s exit from Treasury was rumored, Corzine was pimping the Grand Bargain to reporters in an obvious attempt to position himself for Treasury top spot. Given the composition and inclinations of this administration, Corzine would have fit comfortably at Treasury: the requisite twofer, incompetent and dishonest.
As someone here said once, you can’t spoil what’s already rotten!
Thanks again for the heads up. Luckily I was able to catch the replay at midnight.
Yikes. Granholm loved all the anti-Romney, “what was it like to run against him in 2002″ stuff, but became noticeably discomforted when the lines against Obama, Deval Patrick, and other Democrats came out.
I counted at least three perfunctory interruptions of Stein. First up from Granholm was “don’t Democrats believe the same things as you, how are you any different,” to which Stein described in detail with respect to war (drone escalation and troop withdrawals on preset Bush timelines) and stimulus spending (more to corporate welfare tax cuts then actual stimulative spending) how Democrats talk the talk but fail walk the walk. That wasn’t going well, so then Granholm interrupted again and said “aren’t you worried about a Nader replay from 2000,” to which Stein replied that if you don’t like what you currently have then why would you vote for it again. That too did not sit well for Granholm so she interrupted yet again and said “well isn’t it important for Obama to be President so that he can negotiate CAFE standards and free-trade agreements which he is really invested in and that help your constituents.” Stein replied “no, case in point is the Trans Pacific Free Trade Pact which is NAFTA on steroids.” Granholm then ended the interview by saying “I respect your voice and your policies, but it’s just realism, realism.”
Obama lost his base because he let Wall Street feast upon said base. Yep, that’s exactly what happened on every level.
Hear! Hear!
Good comeback. Your entire response was excellent. Thank you!
Just another of the unintended consequences of not only endorsing, but also profiting from, the criminal activity of criminal bankers. Poetic to say the least.
Well said. The door certainly does swing both ways.
Obama began campaigning the day after he got elected. I think he just likes to ride around on Air Force 1, and he wants to do it again for another 4 years. The man is the very definition of “vanity”.
I vote not to vote.
Now that is what I would call a serious rebuttal. Kudos for the deconstruction.
I find it simultaneously sad and oddly entertaining that OFA is only now in the position to realize that when you screw people over, they might not like you anymore. Of course, this is all about their precious lists and targeting, but in this case it is also a case of causing a mass dislocation of people on your lists and then wondering how to simply find them!
Screw their lists. Obama knew what he was doing when he failed to govern in a decent fashion. Forget about “progressive” governance, he can’t even be decent. He made his bed when he declared all this theft somehow “legal.” People lost their homes and jobs… and now OFA is concerned they can’t find the people BO displaced?
Good luck to OFA on their list-building enterprise! It’s good for them they have the resources to waste on such a Quixotic venture!
But, but, DW…
It’s a win/WIN – can you not see it? The insurmountable problem of having not enough dedicated youthful doorknockers this time around is SOLVED by having less doors to knock upon!
And less doors to knock upon means…wait, there’s an undistributed middle there somewhere…
Never mind.
door-knockers…so “the government” CAN put people to work (preferably unpaid …but it IS work)
And of course they replaced Howard Dean and the 50 States GOTV strategy with whoever ….
As a postal worker, I can testify that a lot of these people will not re-register to vote once they have been uprooted. The DNC is waaay behind this curve, and I don’t know if they will catch up or not.
Bad situation to be in.